Can anyone tell me why WinXP/2000 is superior or better than Win98/ME?

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
I thought this thread was about the benefits of Win2K/XP over Win98/ME...

If so, then

Originally posted by: STaSh

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Like if you had to tell someone who had no knowledge of computers, what would you say?

It's newer. Seriously, if the person was computer illiterate, that's really all they need to know.

ME is newer than 98, so do you believe your statement is still correct? 😉

Win2K/XP has better security (though very few actually utilize it), better hardware and networking support, and much better stability. Also, most newer apps have better support on 2K/XP and some only support 2K/XP.

Best of all, XP is prettier! 🙂

ME is a couple of months newer than 2000. I would just say that 9x is not really Windows and its a fake and it's useless. If you want the real thing, go for 2k/XP. 😛

 

[Smilin]

You can't explain why NT based OSs are better than 9x based OS without talking about User mode versus Executive mode. Although the details are complicated, giving a basic explanation about how this works and how it relates to stability are paramount.

People using Windows 9x are used to having crashes. Explain to them that it doesn't have to be this way and then explain User mode and Executive mode.

 

[tlhudson69]

I have win98 and winXp pro dual booted i havent used win98 wxcept to play a few dos based games. xp has not froze up even once since i started using it. even the couple of crashes i hav had have been MY fault and that was due to hardware not software (needed more mem and processing power than i have to run program- i run programs that require > 1gig cpu and > 750mb mem on my system= slow but it works!!!) CANNOT do that in win98 (I've tried) CRASHES every time XP just slugs allong and gets it done.

 

[casper114]

You should explain user mode vs. executive mode

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: grrl

Originally posted by: Fern
I've tried both for years and have been unable to document any benefit to the upgrade. But I have a small office, no large IT demands.
Fern

And you don't find 2000 more stable than 98? I had endless problems with 98, so I switched to 2000 and never looked back.

I've been using 98se for what seems like forever now in our small professional office with one server and 4 work stations. Since we have never experienced stability problems under 98se, I can't hope to improve on that by upgrading. No doubt the apps we use will eventualy force us to move to another OS. Unlike many others we have to get a new software package each year (we are a Tax/CPA office and tax forms change every year).. I'm hoping to make one jump to 64bit/Longhorn, instead of two jumps - WinXP, then Longhorn.

Around here anyway, most small offices are using 98se (unless they are fairly new businesss which got winXP on their PC's at purchase). The small firms which require some "muscle" in their PC's (CAD, Photoshop etc) seem to use Macs anyway.

I have had win2k and XP on the gaming rig. 2k is OK, didn't like XP (too slow). So currently I have a dual-boot set-up with 98se and 2k (although I left a partition to add XP and make it a triple boot rig later). I haven't been able to demonstarte any performance diff in games between the various OS's. Nor have I been able to find where others have.

I gather this question originated because the OP would like to pursuade someone to change their OS. If it's a small biz, I'd be wary of that. If all their current HW is supported by 98se you may run the risk that some of the older HW may not have drivers for XP (scanners/printers etc). If they are having stability problems, I'd be damn sure it wasn't a HD problem (ram, psu etc) b4 I told them that an upgrade to XP would solve it. The price of the new OS is rather small compared to the downtime for reformat/reinstall, backup and reloading of data and training etc. Remember too that some small businesses can continue to use old apps for many years. Some of their "favorites" may not work with XP and require that it be repurchased as well. Also as far as talk of XP being able to burn CD's, use zip files and USB 2.0, well we have no problem with those either under 98se. Think it through pretty thouroughly or you moght end up with a PITA situation and a PO'd customer.

Fern

 

[casper114]

I recently heard that Microsoft wasn't going to put out anymore updates for any software updates older then windows 2000. Don't know if it's a rumor or not but if it's not that's another damn good reason to make the switch.

 

[The Pentium Guy]

That guy's a newbie right? Just tell him that the computer won't crash as much.

 

[PingSpike]

Don't fvck up as much.

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: casper114
I recently heard that Microsoft wasn't going to put out anymore updates for any software packages older then windows 2000. Don't know if it's a rumor or not but if it's not that's another damn good reason to make the switch.

I sure hope it's true. It probably is given the fact that Microsoft only releases critical security patches for Windows 98/ME. they still release non-critical security patches for Windows 2000.

Although they should have done the same thing with DirectX 9. DirectX 9 should have been Windows 2000/XP/2003 only compatible and IN NO WAY should have supported POS Windows 98/ME!!

Sure, Windows 98SE may be fine for running old software on old systems, BUT IN NO WAY IS IT OK for running today's software on today's systems. ANd that includes systems made a couple of years ago as well.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: casper114
I recently heard that Microsoft wasn't going to put out anymore updates for any software packages older then windows 2000. Don't know if it's a rumor or not but if it's not that's another damn good reason to make the switch.

I sure hope it's true. It probably is given the fact that Microsoft only releases critical security patches for Windows 98/ME. they still release non-critical security patches for Windows 2000.

Although they should have done the same thing with DirectX 9. DirectX 9 should have been Windows 2000/XP/2003 only compatible and IN NO WAY should have supported POS Windows 98/ME!!

Sure, Windows 98SE may be fine for running old software on old systems, BUT IN NO WAY IS IT OK for running today's software on today's systems. ANd that includes systems made a couple of years ago as well.

Judging from your posts here and elsewhere I can see you're on an Anti-98/ME crusade. I don't expect to change your mind. But 98se runs fine on my rig (mobile XP @ 3200+ and better speeds witha 6800GT). They are quite a few others here that run 98se on todays rigs (P4 @ 3.0+ ghz etc) for various reasons. So long as the HW manufacturers make drivers for 98se it'll run on anything fine.

 

[mechBgon]

Limited/Restricted User accounts alone would justify it for me. The days of everyone running loose with Admin-class powers 24/7 are going bye-bye. An ounce of prevention is... yeah 😉

 

[casper114]

I have given numerous reasons why i like xp, Why exactly do ya'll like win 98se so much?

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: casper114
I have given numerous reasons why i like xp, Why exactly do ya'll like win 98se so much?

Blue screen of death
slow boot
instability
runs programs from the late 80s

but i prefer windows ME myself, it has these features x 2

 

[2cpuminimum]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: Nothinman

And 64-bit is still far, far away from mainstream isn't it?

[*]but it doesn't run Mechwarrior2 or Descent/Descent II in all their DOS4GW-powered glory :brokenheart: Yeah, I'm in for a rough life, aren't I 😉[/list]

You can run descent using a dos emulator, dosbox runs just fine on winxp.

 

[Nothinman]

but it doesn't run Mechwarrior2 or Descent/Descent II in all their DOS4GW-powered glory

IIRC Descent and Descent II had their source code released under the GPL a while ago so you can probably find native win32 ports by now, I know I saw Linux ports.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: casper114
I recently heard that Microsoft wasn't going to put out anymore updates for any software packages older then windows 2000. Don't know if it's a rumor or not but if it's not that's another damn good reason to make the switch.

I sure hope it's true. It probably is given the fact that Microsoft only releases critical security patches for Windows 98/ME. they still release non-critical security patches for Windows 2000.

Although they should have done the same thing with DirectX 9. DirectX 9 should have been Windows 2000/XP/2003 only compatible and IN NO WAY should have supported POS Windows 98/ME!!

Sure, Windows 98SE may be fine for running old software on old systems, BUT IN NO WAY IS IT OK for running today's software on today's systems. ANd that includes systems made a couple of years ago as well.

Judging from your posts here and elsewhere I can see you're on an Anti-98/ME crusade. I don't expect to change your mind. But 98se runs fine on my rig (mobile XP @ 3200+ and better speeds witha 6800GT). They are quite a few others here that run 98se on todays rigs (P4 @ 3.0+ ghz etc) for various reasons. So long as the HW manufacturers make drivers for 98se it'll run on anything fine.

Yea i got my new P4 3.8 ghz the other day with dual 6800U's. I plan to run EVERYTHING on ME, im told half life 2 runs like a dream! Its such a great os and i see no need to upgrade! 😉

 

[kurt454]

Originally posted by: mechBgon
Limited/Restricted User accounts alone would justify it for me. The days of everyone running loose with Admin-class powers 24/7 are going bye-bye. An ounce of prevention is... yeah 😉

Only problem is most home XP users are still running under the admin account. Still, my vote is XP/2000 all the way.

 

[glaive]

Just a thought, why not just say 2k/xp wonb't crash like 98/me? Works for teh average know nothing user?

 

[Link19]

Yea i got my new P4 3.8 ghz the other day with dual 6800U's. I plan to run EVERYTHING on ME, im told half life 2 runs like a dream! Its such a great os and i see no need to upgrade!

You must be living in a cave or something. Seriously, why would anyone in their right mind run such a POS opertaing systems like Windows 98/ME on such an awesome system. Windows 98/ME were flat out POS, and there is NO denying that. If you think Windows XP is so bad because it is too bloated, USE Windows 2000. Windows 98/ME should have died at least two years ago. You need a real 32-bit OS in today's computing world. Windows 98/ME DON'T even deserve to be considered a 32-bit OS. Windows 98/ME are 16-bit operating systems basically tweaked and expanded to do what DOS was never capable of or made for. That is more than enough reason why those POS opertaing systems should be phased out all together.

 

[Phoenix86]

They are two different approaches to how to run an OS. The Win9X series is the older, and less capable in general. To someone who's comp. illeterate, that's about all I'd say.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Link19

Yea i got my new P4 3.8 ghz the other day with dual 6800U's. I plan to run EVERYTHING on ME, im told half life 2 runs like a dream! Its such a great os and i see no need to upgrade!

You must be living in a cave or something. Seriously, why would anyone in their right mind run such a POS opertaing systems like Windows 98/ME on such an awesome system. Windows 98/ME were flat out POS, and there is NO denying that. If you think Windows XP is so bad because it is too bloated, USE Windows 2000. Windows 98/ME should have died at least two years ago. You need a real 32-bit OS in today's computing world. Windows 98/ME DON'T even deserve to be considered a 32-bit OS. Windows 98/ME are 16-bit operating systems basically tweaked and expanded to do what DOS was never capable of or made for. That is more than enough reason why those POS opertaing systems should be phased out all together.

I think he was being sarcastic/humurous.

 

[Link19]

I think he was being sarcastic/humurous.

Now that I think of it, you are probably right. Heck, Intel doesn't even have chipset drivers for Windows 98/ME for their latest chipsets. I have an Intel 875P Northbridge chipset. I wish Intel hadn't made Windows 98/ME drivers for this chipset as well. If that were the case, Intel platforms would have probably had better performance and more stability the last few years because they would have been able to focus their testing more on quality opertaing systems. That is why I want WIndows 98/ME wiped out. I mean those POS operating systems being kept around this long has probably held back the PC industry. I believe the 875P chipset was the last chipset that Intel still supported Windows 98/ME for. Or is it only the 865 chipset that Intel supported WIndows 98/Me on, it's just thatr the installer was the same for all the Intel 8XX chipset family 1-2 years ago?

 

[thegorx]

you need xp because people today write sloppy bloated software